From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Mar 18 05:28:45 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B13D113B7 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:28:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nparhar@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pg0-x236.google.com (mail-pg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1569981B for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:28:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nparhar@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pg0-x236.google.com with SMTP id g2so52349212pge.3 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:28:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/wvqP8nqBPp5/klKv5FuyvSHZRYC+g0+u3p6SVDMP/A=; b=NY9C0cDgItZP7mO5qi31PKRtEBX7nHHhO0vuWZhDxKJHDZDXcR9EKRTZUMCv4LTqu4 oChj0ohWxht1WVvQ4l9+AsGhlBuOJRdWfhH1JvKovqYO6SwOdSgMn3Fq0ZudDnZxx4SJ q1cHateU9yes/wSdptDKSEjywo2A4D7U/ybpqepHeyPJNhYmc9pFfNHzhkI2JK05HEgB 6Y4TCSb5EOA7cuXZVoFq/usBI3biTfax/HEB24A4DTX6FHT93Vy8yGsXm4wfVcoIqqec 42zrXKd0owN8mTCoR7KjAFhltUIb4sddseVoDSIUgWMV1VWeDinSSAPTggNGu1H3UjmD V6TA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/wvqP8nqBPp5/klKv5FuyvSHZRYC+g0+u3p6SVDMP/A=; b=U9piTibWGs4rbhx0kR2fFIRH2Rw2vPIz3s9SEMSqkqOjhwHwstw8yte0ukIjrpn+G8 4LRruIL7FmhHB8AhSHkAWCJq7cwRVg2kR8EZQCbInoe+RYyl+SrvBkLuorOiyRe7MKzm 6pETeSeANmyAdelPpFsRaL3eRnl94fu7T9nT8fN+39AudtEpWgNN5xkrVnkeADCu89cT R4TrjkV9FP/YUsRs0eX30JM8I2U4JTykm87X451e+bp8bPlNMxS3Kajs6j3UUdsbFZtK 1ljulTg0u3y6sZs61EVZe/1+DuMXILexbmwdd9Po0KVSsWbGTJgRcaDFVNKYYm2GEWnt Ue8g== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1VKOFiXDJtkPc9Su67PxpBUVWML2eBeisVsfIkE4Ov6MchGvh8gtjkJi3SpwDsPQ== X-Received: by 10.98.204.25 with SMTP id a25mr20494701pfg.6.1489814924453; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ox ([2601:641:c000:b800:1478:ef1e:84fd:b081]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 90sm19933046pfl.24.2017.03.17.22.28.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:28:37 -0700 From: Navdeep Parhar To: John Jasen Cc: Slawa Olhovchenkov , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "Caraballo-vega, Jordan A." Subject: Re: bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530 Message-ID: <20170318052837.GA21730@ox> Mail-Followup-To: John Jasen , Slawa Olhovchenkov , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "Caraballo-vega, Jordan A." References: <20170312231826.GV15630@zxy.spb.ru> <74654520-b8b6-6118-2e46-902a8ea107ac@gmail.com> <173fffac-7ae2-786a-66c0-e9cd7ab78f44@gmail.com> <20170317100814.GN70430@zxy.spb.ru> <9924b2d5-4a72-579c-96c6-4dbdacc07c95@gmail.com> <9694e9f2-daec-924d-e9f6-7b22a634acb5@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9694e9f2-daec-924d-e9f6-7b22a634acb5@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:28:45 -0000 On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:43:32PM -0400, John Jasen wrote: > On 03/17/2017 03:32 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:21 PM, John Jasen wrote: > >> Yes. > >> We were hopeful, initially, to be able to achieve higher packet > >> forwarding rates through either netmap-fwd or due to enhancements based > >> off https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRoutingProposal > > Have you tried netmap-fwd? I'd be interested in how that did in your tests. > > We have. On this particular box, (11-STABLE, netmap-fwd fresh from git) > it took about 1.7m pps in, dropped 500k, and passed about 800k. > > I'm lead to believe that vcxl interfaces may yield better results? Yes, those are the ones with native netmap support. Any netmap based application should use the vcxl interfaces. If you used them on the main cxl interfaces you were running netmap in emulated mode. Regards, Navdeep